each to their own. For fantasy imagination (stage 1) should be mandatory though. For portraits I don't know how important stage 1 is. Can you render skin properly without knowing what is underneath it?

I guess it all depends on the intentions of your art. If you're working on concept art, you can't go copying photos directly and most effort needs to be put into the theme, colour and composition. You can even afford to be sketchy. But when it comes to something like portraits, you obviously have to follow a photo and ideally add something that the photo doesn't offer.

I like that monkey vs. robot pic. It's not ultra detailed, but it works really well and does the job it sets out to do. 

Yeah, detailing should be included in the second stage. I don't know how people ought to go about improving the first stage (sketching?) but it would worth the effort. It would be a pain to be tied down by needing to find references that fit your intention. Also in some of Martin's pics some elements will have reference (and be hyper realistic) but some won't have reference (and will be simple) and overall it looks bad imo. Here is the monkey robot thing I talked about. Maybe his stage 2 is not detailed enough for you but I like the artists who have got both stages down pat best. http://www.robertocampus.com/2007/05/photoshop-and-painter-tutorial-monkey-vs-robot/

If only it was that simple! You forget the detailing stages after cleaning up where you have to add in all the finer elements, texture and depth. This is the most time consuming and challenging part and it's usually quite neglected I feel, which is why so many images (especially in Photoshop) have a sketchy, half-finished look.

Otherwise, I agree that I do struggle during the early stages. I have a good eye for detail, but not such a good eye for shape and proportion.

Rant: I figure there are two stages to drawing. 1st. stage block out the colors. 2nd. stage clean up. You got stage 2 down pat. Stage 1 bit lacking eg. size of guys head, pose etc. My 'prejudice' is a monkey can pull off stage two (though I probably can't pull off what you have done here so well done). imo Stage 1 requires the real thinking/work/talent. If someone is good at 2 without 1 then they are superficially good imo and I resent it (explain above average bitching?).http://www.amazon.co.uk/Digital-Fantasy-Painting-Workshop-McKenna/dp/1904705375/ref=pd_sim_b_13 Saw this in the bookstore. Martin McKenna is just a monkey. He jumps straight to stage 2, basically reproducing photographs with minimal changes. One piece he copied a knight photograph taken in a museum with multiple bright light-sources and then stuck the knight outside on a misty day (only ambient light, one lightsource?). He gets the intro of the book?? Some of the other artists in the book are great (eg. Kong fighting robot) because they are good at stage 1 and 2 and they use references appropriately. This piece was in the past but maybe future pieces you can focus on stage 1 more. Don't use references as a 'crutch'. The real fun is in stage 1. Less bitchin' might result. That said nice website and tute, you definitely know what you are doing for stage 2.

This reminds me of Bilbo Baggins the hobbit against the spiders with Sting his blade.

Haha @ calling big brother mediocre. Its a neat little pixelart, but it could've used more detail.

I think constructive critique is the best way to improve ones work. And I don't see why it has to include something positive. Especially when its very objective, like what has been said by big brother.

You react as if he tried to insult you, instead of taking it as an advice for future pixels. You might want to think of criticism as a help. For "awesome +FAV11" comments check out deviantart O_o

Still this is a nice piece, less for the colours and atmosphere but because of the detail in the trees texture.

I think that's a fair statement. I came here hoping to contribute some of my older work and offer my opinions and advice if anyone wanted it.

I don't consider myself as a particularly good pixel artist and have quite a modest attitude in terms of my work, but I studied pixel art intricately for years dating back to some of the early pioneers, and I became a fan of the many different styles and techniques, so I know my stuff. I've  been irritated by a few comments on my work with phrases like "lack of talent" or "bad pixelling", which I consider a blatant insult rather than constructive criticism. I'm sure you can understand my problem with that, no?

I certainly have no criticisms against newcomers and would really love to encourage them and help if I can. I think there is some amazing work on this site, which is why I wanted to contribute. But it seems to me that there are some big egos here and people who talk with authority, when their own work is pretty mediocre.

I'm used to people not liking my style or having a negative opinion on my work. That's cool with me. It's all about personal taste. I like to experiment with different styles - some work and some fail terribly.

But I've always considered constructive criticism to be a way of highlighting the positive aspects of the work while suggesting some improvements. That way you know what you're doing right and what you're doing wrong. Many users here have done that and that's great. But compared to the comments I've read on other people's work, I feel I've had a lot more flaming than usual (as Frost and Nightmare Maker predicted).

   As for this piece, and it's comments, I didn't see any user here who made a petty insult, or bitched about your piece. He(Big Brother) merely made a comment about the difference in quality of this piece in comparison to the original. I'm sure he understands that it was done when you were younger, and couldn't quite comprehend the palette choices, and technique of the said original artist. Honestly, this site is a fairly critique heavy site, and this is the norm. We feed off each other's critique(and compliments every once in a while, : P).

   This isn't to say we encourage negative comments, either. It's simple really. I'm just getting on your case, as you're getting on the defensive about something that is so normally said and done here. Not to mention, calling other users on the site "amateur" and "mediocre" and calling out "bitchiness" isn't exactly "responding appropriately." In fact, that's acting down right snobbish, to some of the up and comers who may be looking up to you, man. In true maturity, one would simply brush these little comments off, or decide to take a second look and try to improve where a possible mistake may have been spotted. It happens to the best of us.
   Yes, there are people here who sometimes act like asses, or their remarks and inside jokes aren't recognized quickly enough. Shouldn't have much affect on an older artist such as yourself though, I would assume.

   In any case, if you have any more questions, or would like to discuss this further, please pm me, or any of the other mods, and we'll be happy to discuss whichever way you'd like to take this, as I wouldn't want to distract attention away from the piece, which is where the attention needs to be...

Delete my account if you want, you won't see me crying about it.

I can take constructive criticism and genuinely welcome it. I came here with a humble attitiude, but some of the comments here are pure bitchiness based on some kind of anti-demoscener prejudice.

If people continue to throw petty insults at me or make ridiculous comments like the one Big Brother made, I am going to respond appropriately. If you don't like that, then it's best you delete my account.

   Watch it, Wade. What Big Brother is saying isn't exactly a lie, but there's no need to throw out insults like this. To be honest, I've always preferred more of our "mediocre" artist's pieces, than I do some of the older demoscene pics. I know we all look for ass pats, but it's always a value to realize that criticism is a critical point in accepting to become a better artist. No one is perfect, a piece is always flawed in some way or fashion, no matter what age it was done. 

Be careful with your next choice of words, or action will be taken...

*edit* also, may wanna' check your previews, some of them aren't showing up any longer.

Hey, I gave constructive criticism. No "bitchiness" on this side of the table. If you're going to put your works on the internet, you should grow a thicker skin.

Well duh! Rodney Matthews is a professional who has painted all his life and is an expert with his tools, I was just a kid with Deluxe Paint.

The bitchiness on this site is hilarious, especially when it comes from such mediocre artists.

This doesn't capture the excitement of the original. In the original look carefully at the rhythm made by the spider's legs, tree branches in the background, and the flower bulbs. The colors here are dull by comparison -- straight value ramps for each hue.

Oh no, I always hated the shade tool. I preferred to work with pure pixels in most my work and just use a high colour palette to make it look smooth.

I guess Brilliance is better than Dpaint and faster, but I only used it a handful of times because I was so comfortable with Dpaint. I'd like to have a go at pixelling again some time. It will be interesting to see if I can still do it after so many years in Photoshop.

Wade: Ah, I see. Deluxe Paint is the way to go. I suspect you used the shade-function a bit?

Pictures made in Brilliance tend to have a certain "looks" about them. I should bother to learn Brilliance as it seems to be a pretty powerful piece of software but I think that I am a bit too lazy...

It would be nice to see you do some new pixels.

Thanks guys!

I've already had flamings on my other pics, but this was all pixelled in Deluxe Paint 4. I only really used Brilliance in my later portraits for hair and such.

Lots of colors, but a beautiful result.
Like frost said, be prepared for some flamings.

I have always liked this picture. But be prepared for som "this is not pixelart"-flaming.
I would guess that you used Brilliance, am I right?

WOw it's so realistic NICE JOB!

pretty interesting.  After Bilbo I wonder?